If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: More Warre Discussion

That's the thing about beekeeping isn't it? It's what makes these forums so interesting & so frustrating.... 100 or 1000 miles away, it's completely different.

I have one further question, tagging along with what Oldtimer asked:

How would you run Warre hives in a very short, but very heavy, nectar flow?

Another question I've asked before, and I'll ask again, because this is apparently very important in the locale that I'll be beekeeping:

How do you deal with very-granulating honey in the method of leaving hives enough winter stores? (Where I'll be is the Canadian prairies, where fall flow- predominantly canola- is prone to immediate granulation- which means bees will starve or poop like crazy).

This is my (and I realize only mine) predominant concern with the Warre/natural system.

Re: More Warre Discussion

I'm thinking that you didn't read my entire post when I said that if you super you can get just as much as from a Lang. But then, not reading is your thing.Chris

Beez why do you always have to be so offensive. You wonder why all your threads seem to go the same way.

Yes I can read. But "just as much as a lang" means nothing. If we take what my langs produce it is far removed from 60 lbs, and I can't really see how with small Warré boxes and waiting for brood to vacate downwards, a Warré could possibly produce anywhere near as much as my langs.

Hence I asked the question wanting a number, surely you have a rough idea in lb's what your honey production is.

And please don't get all worked up. I'm not saying one hive is better than another, I'm just asking a simple question.

When you say "if i don't super" what does that mean and what effect would it have? Would it produce more than 60 lbs?

Re: More Warre Discussion

That's the thing about beekeeping isn't it? It's what makes these forums so interesting & so frustrating.... 100 or 1000 miles away, it's completely different.

I have one further question, tagging along with what Oldtimer asked:

How would you run Warre hives in a very short, but very heavy, nectar flow?

Another question I've asked before, and I'll ask again, because this is apparently very important in the locale that I'll be beekeeping:

How do you deal with very-granulating honey in the method of leaving hives enough winter stores? (Where I'll be is the Canadian prairies, where fall flow- predominantly canola- is prone to immediate granulation- which means bees will starve or poop like crazy).

This is my (and I realize only mine) predominant concern with the Warre/natural system.

I will answer this question for you before I call it a day, George.

The reason hives end up so full of that junk honey is because humans take all of the bees' good honey and then the bees become desperate. Since you will be leaving any boxes that contain brood, there will also be significant summertime honey being left for them. They will forage the canola very little.

Same goes for the golden rod here in the midwest. People are always commenting about how bad the honey smells and that it granulates fast. My bees rarely, if ever, even touch goldenrod. Your bees will be fine.

As far as the short flow goes, just run your hive using the conventional Warre methods (nadir only) for the first year and then maybe if that goes well you can get at least one super (an additional box from the TOP) of honey during a good year.

Re: More Warre Discussion

Originally Posted by Oldtimer

Would anybody else like to tell me what your average crop would be from a Warré?

I know there will be regional differences etc, just say what you normally get.

The five hives (started the previous year) that went through last years season averaged a harvest of two full boxes or 60 lbs. each. I am hoping to get the same yield this year from the additional 12 hives I started last year.
We don't have a very long season at my location but the girls make a very tasty wildflower honey and since I crush and strain it has lots of pollen in it.

Re: More Warre Discussion

You must be messing with my head. You have to be, because nobody, but nobody could be so stupid as you are pretending to be. A "super" goes on top!! DUH!!

"Super" a box added to a hive for storage of excess honey.
Honey that the hive does not need for winter survival-it's extra.

"Super" Short for superfluous or overflowing.

Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary definition: 1. In excess of what is sufficient, necessary, normal, or desirable; superabundant; surplus.

Old Timer, and George it is embarrassing to read this businessman's and fellow American's posts. I apologize.
Perhaps if you lived within one tank of fuel as I do, instead of the other side of the world, he wouldn't be so obnoxious.

I think the extra box or boxes can be stuck wherever you like.
He can stick his wherever he likes.

I know how to do alot of things with a board, one of which is to make my own square boxes.
I just might need to start making lots of them.

Re: More Warre Discussion

Originally Posted by WPG

I know some metrics but usually work in feet & inches.

I keep a meter stick (mm and cm on one side with inches on the other) stashed within arm’s reach behind my easy chair. It’s amazing how fast one learns to make the conversions once you put your mind to it. Before you know it, it becomes second nature.

Re: More Warre Discussion

"Super" a box added to a hive for storage of excess honey.
Honey that the hive does not need for winter survival-it's extra.

"Super" Short for superfluous or overflowing.

Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary definition: 1. In excess of what is sufficient, necessary, normal, or desirable; superabundant; surplus.

I think the extra box or boxes can be stuck wherever you like.

I apologize for my confusion. I had been under the impression, for some time now, that "supering" a hive meant adding a box for surplus honey to the top of the hive and that "nadiring" was when a box was added to the bottom of the hive. I thought that this was common terminology and knowledge among beekeepers and I made the assumption that someone who has been keeping bees for probably longer than I have been alive would have the same view. So I thank you, WPG, for having straightened this issue out for me. I now know that "supering" and "nadiring" are the exact same thing, and that when someone uses the term "supering", I shall have to ask if they "super" by adding to the top of the hive or to the bottom. I don't know what I was thinking.

Again, accounting for frames--The distance between the side bars of a Lang frame= 17". The distance between the top and bottom bars of a medium Lang frame= 5.25". The width of the 8 frame medium box (your measurement slightly narrower than mine of 32cm)= 12.25".

17x12.25x5.25= 1093.31 cubic inches, or about 60 ci smaller than a Warre box (about a 5% decrease-using your width measurement). Does seem pretty close to me.

I can't figure out why frames reducing the amount of comb in a box is such a difficult concept to grasp. Or is it me who needs straightened out again? Would you care to enlighten me as to why boxes can have the same volume of comb regardless of whether or not frames are used? Seriously...help me out here, please.

Re: More Warre Discussion

He's talking about "supering" the verb. to super or 'supering'- beekeeping terminology describing placing hive boxes above the brood nest in order for bees to store make and store honey. From that has emerged a 'slang' term referring to above placed boxes as 'supers' ie.. the "Illinois super".

"technically" the bees only "need" up to 2 or 3 boxes as a complete nest for their own, un-managed needs. Extra boxes or "supers" are added on top of the brood nest to facilitate encouraging the bees to build above the brood nest and produce surplus honey in non-previously brood comb.

It is possible to get the same volume in various sized boxes such as a taller, square box as opposed to a shallower rectangular box.

The difference in Warre case is he was making the effort to keep a more compact box that contained the heat immediately around the the core of the brood nest as opposed to radiating out to the corners away from the core of the brood nest.

the shallower, wider box does not retain heat at the core of the brood nest as well as the deeper, taller box Warre used in his opinion as expressed in his book.

No, I am NOT a bee "Keeper". Anything I post is just my opinion. Take it easy and think for yourself.

Re: More Warre Discussion

Originally Posted by beez2010

I apologize for my confusion. I had been under the impression, for some time now, that "supering" a hive meant adding a box for surplus honey to the top of the hive and that "nadiring" was when a box was added to the bottom of the hive. I thought that this was common terminology and knowledge among beekeepers and I made the assumption that someone who has been keeping bees for probably longer than I have been alive would have the same view.

Don't worry, we are always learning.

To clarify, nadiring is a term used by people using the Warré method. It is not common terminology.

To everybody else, adding a super is called supering, adding a super, putting on a box, or similar. When a hive has a big honey crop of say 3 or more supers but needs more, we'll sometimes add the new super under the existing honey supers so the bees don't have to haul the new honey all the way up. That is still adding a super, so is called supering.

End of the day though, it's just words. Not really worthy of getting too hung up over. Many beginners can think that the little they know is it, the only truth. As you learn more, and your horizons expand, hopefully you will mellow.

Re: More Warre Discussion

Hello all, thanks for the ongoing discussion. Hope things are cooling down a bit. I have several more questions. If you think they should be separate threads, please let me know.

1) Chris, thank you for answering my question about heavy-granulating honey (ie. canola) as it relates to Warre beekeeping & leaving bees their own honey for winter stores. Does anyone else have experience with this? If bees really will not touch these kind of fall honeys if they are left an amount of lighter summer honey... that is a BIG deal for me, as this was one major concern of mine whether the Warre method would work in the locale I'll be in. Anyone else out there who can second this? I'd hate to think I was doing the bees a favor by leaving them honey, only to find they starved on unusable, cement-honey over winter.

2) Concerning the sacking that goes between the top bars and the quilt. Usually it is dipped in the paste before putting it on. I've read, and also considered myself, that somehow you could use this sacking as propolis collection. My questions are: (1) How would this adversely affect the bees? They will propolize it as their means of controlling the airflow through the hive. By removing it to collect the propolis, I know they could re-propolize it in short order, but would this set them back, and how much? And:
(2) What would be the ideal material for a propolis trap like this? Just the simple burlap and then flushing it out, or would something else be better? Any thoughts or experience on this?

3) Pollen Collection. Because the Warre method seems best suited for branching-out (ie. not solely honey production, but honey, section honey, beeswax, etc.), I've thought pollen collection could be another good source of revenue. However, I have a few qualms about pollen-collection. (1) How does squeezing through the mesh repeatedly harm or wear out the bees? (2) Does collecting pollen (and I know every approach says to never over-collect) stress or set back a colony, and how much? I guess I'm asking, what are your thoughts on the ETHICS of pollen traps? And, (3) Any ideas on designing a Warre bottom that could incorporate a pollen trap, along with screened bottom, varroa sticky board, etc.?

Re: More Warre Discussion

One more idea I had this morning...

I know there are several designs for a knife for separating the comb from the sides of the box. Would it not work well to have a wide and long "blade" (sheet of thin, sharp metal) the width and height of the internal dimensions of the box, that you could use by leaning the box on end, and pushing this wide blade along the box wall, from the bottom up to the top bars, removing one entire side of combs at a time? Seems if it was sharp enough, it would make a nice cut. Then you could (if need be) have access to the combs in that box, after which the bees could easily re-attach.

Re: More Warre Discussion

Originally Posted by curiousgeorge

One more idea I had this morning...

I know there are several designs for a knife for separating the comb from the sides of the box. Would it not work well to have a wide and long "blade" (sheet of thin, sharp metal) the width and height of the internal dimensions of the box, that you could use by leaning the box on end, and pushing this wide blade along the box wall, from the bottom up to the top bars, removing one entire side of combs at a time? Seems if it was sharp enough, it would make a nice cut. Then you could (if need be) have access to the combs in that box, after which the bees could easily re-attach.

Thoughts?

If you go to my website and click on "Our Story" on the menu and scroll down to the second to last pair of photos you will see a box of honey ready to be harvested and the bars of honey after the box has been sleeved off. I set the box on a table bars side down and slice through the comb where it is attached to the sides of the box with a long slender bladed knife. Cut slowly and carefully using a sawing motion and then lift the box off and you can easily reinstall these bars and comb into another box to use for helping a colony get started or supporting a colony in need of reinforcement.
I'm sure you can imagine the benefits of this method for a myriad of other uses.

Re: More Warre Discussion

Originally Posted by curiousgeorge

2) Concerning the sacking that goes between the top bars and the quilt. Usually it is dipped in the paste before putting it on. I've read, and also considered myself, that somehow you could use this sacking as propolis collection. My questions are: (1) How would this adversely affect the bees? They will propolize it as their means of controlling the airflow through the hive. By removing it to collect the propolis, I know they could re-propolize it in short order, but would this set them back, and how much? And:
(2) What would be the ideal material for a propolis trap like this? Just the simple burlap and then flushing it out, or would something else be better? Any thoughts or experience on this?
Thank you!

I have a couple of comments on this question.
The first is to read Ueli's comments on the " Using a Warre quilt" thread in this section.
The second is that when I make the sacking for the under quilt pad, I lay a length of burlap on a flat table and smear the paste (using Warre's recipe) over it and after it has dried I cut it to size.
I have found that in some of my hives the bees not only remove some of the propolis that they have installed but also chew through the burlap to create the ventilation they need.
I can't think of an efficient method to remove propolis from a rye paste impregnated piece of sacking. I have, however, dissolved propolis, scraped of of hive boxes, in lacquer thinner and found it to be a good candidate for a hardwood stain/finish.